Evaluation of TikTok videos on acute pancreatitis: content quality and reliability analysis
Tianyang Mao,Xin Zhao,Kangyi Jiang,Jie Yang,Qingyun Xie,Jinqiang Fu,Bo Du,Zehua Lei,Fengwei Gao
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18708-2
IF: 4.5
2024-05-02
BMC Public Health
Abstract:Background: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common acute digestive system disorder, with patients often turning to TikTok for AP-related information. However, the platform's video quality on AP has not been thoroughly investigated. Objective: The main purpose of this study is to evaluate the quality of videos about AP on TikTok, and the secondary purpose is to study the related factors of video quality. Methods: This study involved retrieving AP-related videos from TikTok, determining, and analyzing them based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Relevant data were extracted and compiled for evaluation. Video quality was scored using the DISCERN instrument and the Health on the Net (HONcode) score, complemented by introducing the Acute Pancreatitis Content Score (APCS). Pearson correlation analysis was used to assess the correlation between video quality scores and user engagement metrics such as likes, comments, favorites, retweets, and video duration. Results: A total of 111 TikTok videos were included for analysis, and video publishers were composed of physicians (89.18%), news media organizations (13.51%), individual users (5.41%), and medical institutions (0.9%). The majority of videos focused on AP-related educational content (64.87%), followed by physicians' diagnostic and treatment records (15.32%), and personal experiences (19.81%). The mean scores for DISCERN, HONcode, and APCS were 33.05 ± 7.87, 3.09 ± 0.93, and 1.86 ± 1.30, respectively. The highest video scores were those posted by physicians (35.17 ± 7.02 for DISCERN, 3.31 ± 0.56 for HONcode, and 1.94 ± 1.34 for APCS, respectively). According to the APCS, the main contents focused on etiology (n = 55, 49.5%) and clinical presentations (n = 36, 32.4%), followed by treatment (n = 24, 21.6%), severity (n = 20, 18.0%), prevention (n = 19, 17.1%), pathophysiology (n = 17, 15.3%), definitions (n = 13, 11.7%), examinations (n = 10, 9%), and other related content. There was no correlation between the scores of the three evaluation tools and the number of followers, likes, comments, favorites, and retweets of the video. However, DISCERN (r = 0.309) and APCS (r = 0.407) showed a significant positive correlation with video duration, while HONcode showed no correlation with the duration of the video. Conclusions: The general quality of TikTok videos related to AP is poor; however, the content posted by medical professionals shows relatively higher quality, predominantly focusing on clinical presentations and etiologies. There is a discernible correlation between video duration and quality ratings, indicating that a combined approach incorporating the guideline can comprehensively evaluate AP-related content on TikTok.